Some thougts on cartesian products

[Fredrik Lundh]

Terry Reedy wrote:

> You might so define, but Bryan and others might not.  The
> philosophical/methodological idea that 'everything is a set' has been very
> fruitful but it is not a fact.  Alternative ideas are 'everything is a
> function' and 'everything is defined by axioms'.

according to google, ideas such as

    everything is illuminated
    everything is a miracle
    everything is an object

and even

    everything is a fscking dns problem

seems to be a bit more common.

</F>